Latest Himachal Pradesh Hc updates from LegalRepublic.in.
Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj quashed the 2011 seniority list of Assistant Engineers (Civil) in the Irrigation and Public Health Department that placed Public Service Commission recruits en bloc below promotees of 2008, holding that the State could not promote Junior Engineers on 31 December 2008 beyond their quota while the recommended recruits waited.
A division bench dismissed 21 writ petitions by schools, educational societies and nursing institutes, holding that the State could bar vehicles older than 15 years from student transport under its permit rule-making power without trespassing on the Centre's power to fix a vehicle's life, and that the cap binds every educational institution.
Justice Rakesh Kainthla dismissed a second appeal pending since 2008 by purchasers who bought part of a Una plot from the vendor on the very day a specific performance suit was filed against her. Reading the High Court Rules on the court petition box, the judge held the plaint was presented by 10.15 am, so both sales were pendente lite, Section 19(b) of the
A division bench of Justice Vivek Singh Thakur and Justice Bhupesh Sharma dismissed the State appeal against the 2018 acquittal of three men stopped in a Mahindra Xylo at Dohri Diwar, Solan. Both independent witnesses denied seeing the recovery, the police officers contradicted each other on where the secret information was received and where the bag was ope
Justice Sushil Kukreja refused to reject a Rs 6.36 crore mortgage suit by a real estate company, holding that a one-off loan with no mercantile document, made by a company that is not a banker, trader or financier, falls outside Section 2(1)(c)(i) of the Commercial Courts Act even if it carries interest and funded a housing project.
A Division Bench of Justice Vivek Singh Thakur and Justice Bhupesh Sharma held that the Electricity Act vests suitability in the Selection Committee headed by a retired High Court judge, that the Government may only pick one of the two names recommended, and that rejecting the panel for want of apex-scale seniority was arbitrary and a case of legal mala fide
Answering a reference that split three single-judge rulings, Justice Vivek Singh Thakur and Justice Bhupesh Sharma held that the statutory bond form makes forfeiture the immediate consequence of the absence of the accused, that the show-cause notice belongs to the recovery stage, and that a chance to produce the accused is judicial discretion, not a right.
Justice Vivek Singh Thakur and Justice Ranjan Sharma found that a promotion file ready for the Screening Committee was parked with a Please speak note while a parallel file carried the Chief Minister approval through in a single day, with no public interest shown and the notes of the Department itself pointing the other way.
Justice Rakesh Kainthla held that testimony about two other girls the accused allegedly molested the same night was inadmissible under Sections 5 and 14 of the Evidence Act, and that the Sessions court relied on it to uphold the conviction.
Justice Rakesh Kainthla held that every occupant of a vehicle is prima facie in conscious possession of contraband found in it, that the Section 37 twin conditions were not met, and that the Supreme Court made its grounds-of-arrest ruling prospective.
Justice Rakesh Kainthla found that Firoz Khan should have been charged under Section 21, not Section 22, because dextropropoxyphene is not a scheduled psychotropic substance, but held the error caused no prejudice and that 202 capsules put him 0.2 grams over the small-quantity line.
Justice Rakesh Kainthla held that Section 50 of the NDPS Act had no role where nothing was taken from the body of the accused, that the driver and conductor were independent enough, and that three years for 28 grams was disproportionate when 250 grams is the commercial line.
Justice Rakesh Kainthla acquitted a man prosecuted since 2007, holding that the chemical examiner never said the liquor differed from licensed distillery spirit and that two bottles are within the permissible limit.
Justice Rakesh Kainthla dismissed a revision against concurrent convictions under Section 138, holding there is no infirmity in a sentence imposed in default of payment of compensation.
Justice Rakesh Kainthla dismissed a revision pending since 2014, upholding a conviction under Section 354 IPC and a sentence of one year's simple imprisonment.
Justice Rakesh Kainthla dismissed a revision from 2014, upholding convictions from a 2009 accident at Nahan and declining to reduce the sentence.
Fifteen years after conviction, the Himachal Pradesh High Court acquits on Section 50 of the NDPS Act — a recovery made in breach of it cannot be relied on at all.
Justice Rakesh Kainthla refuses to quash an FIR over a sale deed executed by an impostor, holding that the registering officer was affected by the misrepresentation and is entitled to object, and that forgery offences are not quashable on a private settlement.
Justice Rakesh Kainthla dismisses a revision against enhanced compensation under Section 138, holding that on the Kalamani Tex scale a fine of up to twice the cheque amount with nine per cent interest would have been the norm.
Justice Rakesh Kainthla holds that the proximate cause was permitting a passenger to sit on the load and failing to take care while negotiating a curve, that whether the bus was moving is immaterial, and that the trial court completely misread the evidence.
A Division Bench of Justices Vivek Singh Thakur and Ranjan Sharma quashed a 2016 notification for fifty-eight Health Educators and ordered a higher grade pay from October 2012.
